Teams

SJPragasam/KLoor (Jeff Adams)

2026 Combo Doubles 18 & Over League · 18 & Over Combo 6.5 Women

10 players · average NTRP 3.10 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule4 upcoming · 4 played
Sep 9 6:30 PM
vs
Park Road Park
Sep 16 6:30 PM
vs
Jeff Adams Tennis Center
Sep 23 8:00 PM
Jeff Adams Tennis Center
Sep 30 7:00 PM
Jeff Adams Tennis Center
2026-09-02vs JHargis (Pine Lake)Won 30
W#1 DoublesElizabeth Kennard / Barbara Davis vs Anna Vagnerini / Kelly Guadagnino6-3, 6-2
W#2 DoublesSJ Pragasam / Vicki King vs Beth Barnes / Ashle Basden6-1, 6-3
W#3 DoublesJennifer Little / Liesl Graf vs Kelly Edwards / Gretchen Pfeiffer6-0, 6-1
2026-08-19vs KRichards (Raintree)Lost 12
L#1 DoublesKate Kirschner / Amanda Cheek vs Kimberly Rupnarine / Karen Allen2-6, 2-6
W#2 DoublesSJ Pragasam / Kelly Sylvester vs Alyson Sunden / Stacy Andrews3-6, 6-4, 1-0
L#3 DoublesJennifer Little / Kate Loor vs Nicole Love / Katrina Richards5-7, 0-6
2026-08-14vs JMugnano (Queens)Won 30
W#1 DoublesAmanda Cheek / Kate Kirschner vs Sarah Barden / Paige MacEra4-6, 6-1, 1-0
W#2 DoublesElizabeth Kennard / Barbara Davis vs Virginia Carley / Melissa Kaufman6-3, 6-3
W#3 DoublesJennifer Little / Kelly Sylvester vs Nicole Nelson / Emily Pansa6-0, 6-3
2026-08-12vs EAnderson (Queens)Lost 12
L#1 DoublesElizabeth Kennard / Liesl Graf vs Lori DiFazio / Devon Fuller3-6, 2-6
L#2 DoublesErin Roach / Kate Loor vs Colleen Cappello / Emilia Anderson2-6, 4-6
W#3 DoublesSJ Pragasam / Barbara Davis vs Allie Doub / Lindsay Lillibridge7-5, 6-4
A tie can be incomplete. Tell us if someone is missing.
i
Grouped by tie — one fixture, several lines. A line shows only when a player on it is someone we have indexed, so an early-season tie for a newly-added team can look short. This also means the line count here will not match the header, which counts individual player appearances.
Flight standings35 teams · 18 & Over Combo 6.5 Women
TeamWLInd. WInd. LSets lostGames lost
1MMohammed/SAliota (Carmel)3090149
2MWalters (Carmel)3081453
3MWolf/JShelley (WSRC)3072559
4VShannon (Raintree)3081558
5RJoplin (Queens)3063770
6JWaleski (OPRC)2051227
7AMcGarry/AIngalls (CSRC)2051345
8LHumphries/Miller (Raintree)2042446
9TRicks (Queens)2042552
10LQuattlebaum/Mullins (OPRC)2172667
11MMetzl (Sardis)2163761
12JRuggiero/LMonty (Palisades)21541086
13AChristie/ASmith (PPRSC)21541074
14MLong/SFarley (Queens)1142548
15AEagan/SSamuelson (WRSC)1142657
16HLee/SRock (Piper Glen)1133655
17RVora/SMoon (Lifetime)1133752
18DCazorla (BCC)1254980
19SLind (Bridgehampton)1254968
20ELeMaitre (Park Road)12541083
21SJPragasam/KLoor (Jeff Adams)12541084
22MAllen/SStork (Sardis)12451195
23SChandra (Charlotte Tennis)12361387
24MLGarrison (Sardis)12361394
25CKing (Life Time)12271498
26PSweeney (FCC)122715101
27APessina/LAbhoulson (Queens)0224850
28SHarris/KSmith (Park Road)0224868
29BBaker (Queens)0224855
30CArevalo (Park Road)0224963
31CTharp (Queens)02151061
32JHargis (Pine Lake)02151069
33JMugnano (Queens)02061271
34LCulp (Park Road)03181694
35KWagner (Jeff Adams)030918105

Ordered by team wins, then losses, then sets lost — the order USTA uses to seed a flight. Individual wins are lines, not ties.

See the full flight, with every team’s record

ScoutingWhere each opponent usually plays

Signed-in extra: whether this captain plays strict strength order or mixes it up, from every doubles line they have put out. Create a free account to see it.

Roster averages 3.06 estimated across 10 rated players. No lineup is published in advance, so the column below is where each player has actually been used — a captain's habits are the best available forecast. Sign in and claim your record to see who you have played.

3.44
Elizabeth Kennard
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 33% · published
3.29
Amanda Cheek
usually #1 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published 3.5
3.27
SJ Pragasam
usually #2 Doubles 67%, also #3 Doubles 33% · published
3.09
Kelly Sylvester
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
3.04
Kate Kirschner
usually #1 Doubles 100% · published 3
3.02
Erin Roach
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 50% · published
2.94
Kate Loor
usually #2 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.93
Liesl Graf
usually #1 Doubles 50%, also #3 Doubles 50% · published 3
2.83
Vicki King
usually #2 Doubles 100% · published
2.71
Barbara Davis
usually #3 Doubles 50%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3
Established pairs

Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.

Liesl Graf + Kate Kirschner134 matchesnot enough data
Kate Loor + Amanda Cheek123 matchesnot enough data
Amanda Cheek + Kate Kirschner213 matchesnot enough data
Elizabeth Kennard + Barbara Davis303 matchesnot enough data
Roster

Ordered by our estimated dynamic rating, which is why two players at the same published level are not tied — a published 4.0 says nothing about where inside the band someone sits. Lines played in this team’s season are shown beside each name.

Elizabeth Kennard
14W–9L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%66%34%
3.44
3.5
Amanda Cheek
10W–22L career · 3 lines in 2026
2%91%7%
3.29
SJ Pragasam
10W–15L career · 6 lines in 2026
<1%3%97%
3.27
Kelly Sylvester
6W–3L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%26%74%
3.09
3
Kate Kirschner
29W–26L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%40%60%
3.04
Erin Roach
4W–19L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%44%56%
3.02
3
Kate Loor
49W–67L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%66%34%
2.94
3
Liesl Graf
91W–119L career · 2 lines in 2026
<1%69%31%
2.93
Vicki King
8W–10L career · 1 line in 2026
1%88%11%
2.83
3
Barbara Davis
16W–19L career · 4 lines in 2026
7%91%2%
2.71

Three percentages are where each player stands right now: the chance they are below their band, inside it, or above it, on the way they are playing this season. The number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. This is today rather than a forecast of December, because a forecast has to assume future matches and cannot know whether someone will even be offered them. Percentages are blank where a player has too few matches this season, or at a level where the model does not yet beat a base-rate guess; the estimate is a weaker claim than a probability and survives where those do not.

Not affiliated with or endorsed by the USTA. Ratings labelled as published are USTA year-end figures; anything we describe as an estimate is ours, not USTA’s. Match data is from USTA TennisLink.